Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-34839 is a high-severity Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (CWE-200) vulnerability in Nicolargo Glances. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 33th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and IA-2 (Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users)) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-23986
Vulnerability Data
Glances is an open-source system cross-platform monitoring tool. Prior to version 4.5.4, the Glances web server exposes a REST API (`/api/4/*`) that is accessible without authentication and allows cross-origin requests from any origin due to a permissive CORS policy (`Access-Control-Allow-Origin:…
more
*`). This allows a malicious website to read sensitive system information from a running Glances instance in the victim’s browser, leading to cross-origin data exfiltration. While a previous advisory exists for XML-RPC CORS issues, this report demonstrates that the REST API (`/api/4/*`) is also affected and exposes significantly more sensitive data. Version 4.5.4 patches the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Permissive CORS + unauthenticated REST API on public-facing web server directly enables browser-based cross-origin data exfiltration via exploitation of the exposed application.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
- 13 hardening rules · 9 OS baselines
V3.4.3V3.4.6V10.4.9V11.7.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces authentication and authorization requirements on the /api/4/* REST endpoints, blocking unauthenticated cross-origin access that enables data exfiltration.
Requires identification and authentication of users before allowing access to the Glances web API, eliminating the missing-authentication weakness.
Enforces information-flow rules that can restrict permissive CORS policies (Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *) and limit cross-origin data exposure.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Directly requires authentication of users/services/hardware, which eliminates missing authentication for critical functions.
PR.AA-05 directly enforces least-privilege authorization that blocks most unauthorized disclosures, yet CWE-200 also arises from logging, error messages, and side-channel paths that access controls alone do not address.
PR.DS-10 mostly prevents CWE-200 by directly eliminating unauthorized access to sensitive data-in-use, yet only partially addresses the weakness because CWE-200 spans many other exposure vectors outside runtime protection.
PR.IR-01's segmentation/zero-trust controls largely eliminate network-level unauthorized access paths that enable exposure, yet CWE-200 spans many additional vectors (API responses, logs, app logic) that network controls alone cannot close.
Hardened configuration baselines and reviews directly prevent permissive CSP or cross-domain policies.
Secure SDLC practices catch most exposure flaws via design, testing and release controls, yet CWE-200 spans runtime/config issues a single development outcome cannot fully close.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Restricting anonymous or unknown access and encrypting high-value information limits the exposure of sensitive data that would otherwise be obtainable by unauthorized actors.
Suppressing system details, error specifics, and previous log-on information until successful authentication reduces the information an unauthenticated attacker can gather.
By requiring owners to assign sensitivity labels and corresponding handling rules, the control ensures that information is not left unmarked and therefore reduces the chance that sensitive data will be exposed to unauthorized actors.
Requiring encryption, access controls, and recipient authentication for transfers directly reduces the chance that sensitive data reaches an unauthorized observer.
Secure delivery, protected storage, and confidentiality of allocation records limit exposure of authentication material to unauthorized observers.
Requiring defined procedures, assigned roles, and technical/organizational measures for handling PII reduces the chance that sensitive personal data will be exposed to unauthorized actors through inadequate handling or missing safeguards.